Ditto.
Please note that I partially retired on 01/11/2015. I am now only working 7.5 hours a week and can only guarantee e-mail response on Wednesdays, my day in the office. All vocabulary queries should be sent to enquiries at bodc.ac.uk. Please also use this e-mail if your requirement is urgent.
________________________________
From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Karl Taylor <taylor13 at llnl.gov>
Sent: 21 July 2017 16:45
To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Sign convention of upwelling and downwelling fluxes
Yes I agree.
Karl
On 7/21/17 2:41 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> Dear Martin
>
> The words upwelling and downwelling were chosen specifically with the intention
> of indicating the sign convention! Upwelling means positive upwards,
> downwelling means positive downwards, in standard names. If that's not clear in
> the definitions, we should clarify them.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Jonathan
>
> ----- Forwarded message from martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk -----
>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 08:47:44 +0000
>> From: martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk
>> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> Subject: [CF-metadata] Sign convention of upwelling and downwelling fluxes
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> there are standard names for a number of upwelling and downwelling fluxes, defined clearly as the component of radiation which is travelling upwards or downwards. The sign convention of these fluxes is not specified .. CMIP uses the convention that downwelling is positive down and upwelling is positive upwards, but in the atmospheric literature you can find people using the convention that both are positive upwards. Both approaches make sense, but it leaves us with some ambiguity in the standard names.
>>
>> Since 2008 there are a few terms like minus_one_times_surface_upwelling_longwave_flux_in_air which are defined as having the opposite sign convention to terms without "minus_one_times_". But surface_upwelling_longwave_flux_in_air has no explicit sign convention. The inclusion of the minus_one_times terms implies that at least some people thought that the existing standard names should have a specific sign convention ... and I hope, if that is the case, that it can be consistent with CMIP. If so, can we clear up the ambiguity by adding a line in the description of these standard names to say that the sign convention is positive upwards/downwards for upwelling/downwelling fluxes?
>>
>> regards,
>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
CF-metadata Info Page - University Corporation for ...<
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata>
mailman.cgd.ucar.edu
This is an unmoderated list for discussions about interpretation, clarification, and proposals for extensions or change to the CF conventions.
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
CF-metadata Info Page - University Corporation for ...<
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata>
mailman.cgd.ucar.edu
This is an unmoderated list for discussions about interpretation, clarification, and proposals for extensions or change to the CF conventions.
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
________________________________
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.
________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20170721/149c49c7/attachment.html>
Received on Fri Jul 21 2017 - 11:20:01 BST
